Nikon AFS 35/1.4G vs 24/1.4G

[greengoblin]

There is always the < $1000 AIS 50mm f1.2 It is good stuff

Anyway I have no complains about the 24. Serves me very well in very low light shooting. Almost no hunting

 

[jeff7id]

20mm f/1.4G sounds good! But probably will use 105mm sized filters.. :bsmilie:

Refer to the price of AFS 24mm f/1.4G, the price of AFS 20mm f/1.4G won't sound good either

 

[mogwai]

I felt that 35mm is too close to 50mm - would personally get the 24mm f/1.4G and buddy it with a 85G. 2 lenses to cover 99.99% of my needs.

I would prefer the combo of "35 + 85". I'm waiting to see if Nikon would come out something like 20mm f1.4G then I will buy it rather than the 24mm f1.4G, like the old primes where they had 18,20,24,28/2.8D.

i'm more like kent.

i don't have a full 2.8 'trinity' (17-35 and 24-70 only) but i have my own 'trinity' for travelling - 35 + 50 + 85.

but because 35 is so close to 50, i tend to take out the 50, especially now with 35/1.4.

i've never owned the 28/1.4 and with these 2, probably won't ever. but those guys who have it may have a tough choice between 24 or 35? or float more towards the 24?

 

[icarus]

i'm more like kent.

i don't have a full 2.8 'trinity' (17-35 and 24-70 only) but i have my own 'trinity' for travelling - 35 + 50 + 85.

but because 35 is so close to 50, i tend to take out the 50, especially now with 35/1.4.

i've never owned the 28/1.4 and with these 2, probably won't ever. but those guys who have it may have a tough choice between 24 or 35? or float more towards the 24?

For me - 24G + 50G will be the ultimate travel kit... if my bag have space.. then 85G will go in as well. Depends on your style of shooting really... i prefer llandscapes and upclose portraits shot so 24mm will work for me.

 

[jeff7id]

i'm more like kent.

i don't have a full 2.8 'trinity' (17-35 and 24-70 only) but i have my own 'trinity' for travelling - 35 + 50 + 85.

but because 35 is so close to 50, i tend to take out the 50, especially now with 35/1.4.

i've never owned the 28/1.4 and with these 2, probably won't ever. but those guys who have it may have a tough choice between 24 or 35? or float more towards the 24?

Full Nikon trinity is 14-24 + 24-70 + 70-200

Why should someone choose 24 f/1.4, if he/she has already owned the 14-24 trinity lens ?

 

[mogwai]

Full Nikon trinity is 14-24 + 24-70 + 70-200

Why should someone choose 24 f/1.4, if he/she has already owned the 14-24 trinity lens ?

hmm. i can think of 3

1. 1.4 vs 2.8 is quite a bit of light (although, cams nowadays can easily make it up with ISO)

2. filters (not that 14-24 can't but it's easier with a thread)

3. sharper??? not sure about this one but prime vs zoom...

 

[kentwong81]

Another two:

1) 1.4G can isolate the subject much better at the same wide angle 24mm. This can create creative and artistic work that the 14-24 can't.

2) 1.4G is lighter and less bulky than the 14-24.

hmm. i can think of 3

1. 1.4 vs 2.8 is quite a bit of light (although, cams nowadays can easily make it up with ISO)

2. filters (not that 14-24 can't but it's easier with a thread)

3. sharper??? not sure about this one but prime vs zoom...

 

[2100]

Full Nikon trinity is 14-24 + 24-70 + 70-200

Why should someone choose 24 f/1.4, if he/she has already owned the 14-24 trinity lens ?

Got geek-type youtube HD veedio here,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6X3YNp-jz4&feature=channel

 

[cyberixus]

I pair my D700 with 24 f1.4 , 35 f2 , 50 f1.8 and 70-200VR.

The 50mm is the least used lens. Before purchasing the 24mm, I find myself using the 35mm the most and at times find it not wide enough. Now I find myself changing between the 24 and 70-200VR most of the time.